Jump to content


Attention: In order to reply to messages, create topics, have access to other features of the community you must sign up for an account.
Union Tpke

General SBS Discussion

Recommended Posts

The Bx6 SBS is unusual. First, the route doesn't have an existing limited route to convert to SBS, unlike the Bx12, M15, B44, or B46. Second, the local route will stay, unlike the M86 or M23.

 

IMO the B82 SBS should continue on Kings Highway past Flatbush unlike the current B82, which turns right. Then the B82 SBS should turn right on Glenwood and continue the whole way until Pennsylvania Av. This should be done for both directions of B82 SBS, and anyway, even if the B82 retained the same route, would be much faster for SBS riders since Glenwood has fewer routes and bus frequency than Flatlands.

If a LIC route is being converted to SBS, how about the Q69? The only thing is that in the north, it parallels the M60. Looks like the most logical choice though; the Q102 is right under the Astoria line, and the Q103 and Q104 basically hug the shore, serving a smaller area.

I believer the Q66 is the route the MTA is looking at for Astoria. The route is painfully slow on most days. However the Q69 it has an Limited variant called the Q100 which might be a better option for SBS IMO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know that you guys keep talking about the Coney Island section being light and underused. My question is that if it's light, would it be easier to add a few stops after Ulmer Park or would that be too much? I know the idea of SBS is board all doors with fewer stops, but I'm trying to understand why local and not SBS?

 

That would be too much. The portion after Ulmer Park is served by the B82 local already.. No need for additional stops.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know that you guys keep talking about the Coney Island section being light and underused. My question is that if it's light, would it be easier to add a few stops after Ulmer Park or would that be too much? I know the idea of SBS is board all doors with fewer stops, but I'm trying to understand why local and not SBS?

B82 south of the (D) (Bay Pkwy) is light..... Adding more stops period defeats the purpose of (what the MTA wants to accomplish with) SBS....

 

One of their end goals with SBS is to have it (or at least give the illusion of) trump LTD service in terms of speed & runtime.....

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know that you guys keep talking about the Coney Island section being light and underused. My question is that if it's light, would it be easier to add a few stops after Ulmer Park or would that be too much? I know the idea of SBS is board all doors with fewer stops, but I'm trying to understand why local and not SBS?

If I had my way, the B82 would be cut short or it would have SBS all the way to Coney Island. I rode it once years ago and it was painful making all of those stupid stops along Cropsey.  Never again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It seems like the MTA does whatever it wants without explanation. The B82 SBS was supposed to start in Bay Ridge. What ever happened to that?

 

The B5 and B50 never should have been combined in the first place. The B82 needs to be split up. Now like the B46 they are making people who want to take advantage of the faster service to pay an extra fare from the end of the route if they want a second transfer.

 

 

B82 to Bay Ridge ??  I'm confused (pls elaborate).. The current B82 starts in Coney Island & Ulmer Park.

Why in hell the (MTA) even thought about starting a route in Bay Ridge 4th Avenue..

 

I'm in full agreement with you with the B5 and B50 should of never had to split.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm just worried about the Canarsie rerouting. It seems narrow from what I seen. I think for the most part, whatever they plan is at least decent.

 

As for expansion of both terminals, the gateway area again is more of a fantasy proposal, so I don't expect that to happen, but I'm more confused about the Coney Island part. Probably because I have a mindset that the express variant of the local should run the full route with the local only filling in certain sections, like the Bx12.

My thought is that it would be westbound Glenwood Rd would be bus-only westbound between 103rd and 96th.

 

I suspect that people complained about having stops removed because of the amount of seniors that use it, along with the numerous hills that the bus traverses. It's one the of main reasons the route sees the usage that it does, otherwise I'm sure more people would just walk.

I assume so, but then I'm unsure whom this SBS benefits.

 

From my observations and reading this powerpoint. I would like to point out a few things.

 

1) No need to have an Avenue K and Kings Highway bus stop. While I do agree with the re-route heading down Kings Highway to Avenue K it speeds up the route by a measly few minutes.

 

2) What bothers me is that they are not using Avenue P as a potential re-route. This SBS route would perform excellent if it were re-routed on Avenue P. I get the traffic issues in the area. However, I want to see how they (MTA) and DOT address those issues. Too many business on that stretch of Kings Highway from Ocean Avenue to Ocean Parkway.

 

3) The best thing I see in this presentation is the cut to Coney Island. This here makes the most sense. As a few people here indicated that the CI portion of the route doesn't see heavy ridership, and plus the (B)(Q)(D)(F)(N) provides direct access to Stillwell & Mermaid and West 16th.

 

4) The Canarsie reroute: If the DOT decides to go back to the two-way on Glenwood the stretch between Rockaway Parkway and East 103 is very narrow. I could only think that could be a bus-only access to Rockaway Parkway (L). Finally, glad they are going to address the Flatlands & Ralph intersection.

Agree with all these sentiments.

 

sounds like the bx6sbs is going to be like the bx41sbs.

 

the only good things about the B82sbs is midday and later evening service i would think.

Nah the road changes on the B82 route are more important than most would believe, gotta take the route in the area in different times of day to notice.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I assume so, but then I'm unsure whom this SBS benefits.

 

I guess those people that ride for most of the route.  The problem is you have people that ride it for short distances such as from say 163rd and 3rd to River Avenue. The real issue is the slow boarding and dwell times, which is another reason that it makes no sense to keep local service.  You could still eliminate a few stops along the way and make the line efficient.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Unless there's artics for the Q53. I don't see this starting in November or December of this year. I see this as more of a Winter/Spring 2018 pet project for Queens. This would be the perfect BRT model if executed correctly.  Also my next question would be will the Q52/53 be LGA once SBS begins or at College Point?

 

I briefly look at the M79SBS. If they (DOT) and (MTA) do get this project on time for May 21st. It's about to be one hell of a summer for those business on Columbus Avenue, Broadway and Amsterdam Avenue. The parking restrictions and the ticket blitz that await these business along the Upper West Side. At last check I thought the people on the Upper West Side had a voice at City Hall. Now that they are being forced into the SBS network all that changes. The East Side of the route doesn't really look too bad.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It seems like the MTA does whatever it wants without explanation. The B82 SBS was supposed to start in Bay Ridge. What ever happened to that?

B82 or B86?

 

If I had my way, the B82 would be cut short or it would have SBS all the way to Coney Island.

At minimum, I would revert the B50...

 

West of the Brighton, I'd extend the 100 to Caesars Bay shopping ctr....

 

...the only good things about the B82sbs is midday and later evening service i would think.

Don't know what you're trying to say with this....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It seems like the MTA does whatever it wants without explanation. The B82 SBS was supposed to start in Bay Ridge. What ever happened to that?

 

The B5 and B50 never should have been combined in the first place. The B82 needs to be split up. Now like the B46 they are making people who want to take advantage of the faster service to pay an extra fare from the end of the route if they want a second transfer.

 

Let's look at the proposal for the B82. It simply is to convert the Limited to SBS. A much better route could be designed. Kings Highway is not suitable for SBS. Putting SBS on the two lane congested portion is ridiculous. Traffic on the wide portion moves fine at all times even during rush hours so exclusive lanes are not necessary. They will have no effects on bus speeds but will slow down other traffic considerably causing congestion where none exists now.

 

On Flatlands Avenue exclusive lanes also will not work unless you ban parking. Imagine the delays with only one traffic lane each way when the Belt is backed up.

 

What they could do is the following if they want an SBS route. Truncate the eastern end of the B82 at Ralph Avenue. Make the eastern end SBS and operate it from Spring Creek Towers along its current route to Avenue P (keeping the Limited) and reroute it off Kings Highway to stay on Avenue P and continue along 65 Street stopping only at even numbered avenues where it would make all transfers. It could continue on to Shore Road passing the 59 Street station and down Shore Road until the end. Through travelers do not need a transfer to the Brighton Line which would still be available with the B82 Limited, local and B7.

 

The SBS (B81) could also be extended to Gateway.

 

There is also a plan for the B41 SBS.

 

What is the B81? Unless that's a typo, I need some clarity on that and the B82 SBS to Bay Ridge. I've never heard of that. Ever.
 
If that is a typo and you meant B82 SBS - then absolutely not. As I already said earlier, the Belt Parkway would screw that up real quickly. Unless you go the "back way" using local streets, which I mentioned somewhere else in the forums, and got met with the "it's a roundabout routing" - to which I said "it's still faster than the Belt". Now that they've added the speedbumps on Van Siclen Av between Seaview Av and Vandalia Av - it would be slower.
 
On the wide portions of Flatlands Avenue (Ralph to Pennsylvania) there is congestion and disorganization during the rush hours. People double park, lots of traffic because people wanna avoid the Belt Parkway, etc. The lanes will help the buses there during those peak hours (only). And maybe during the rush hours they should ban parking on that wide section of Flatlands Av.
 
Your SBS idea isn't bad. I like some of it.
 
What I like about your idea is the better connections it'd make for people on the western side of the route. I'm down for Bay Ridge for the most part - just some slight changes I would make on that end. More info below.
 
What I don't like about your idea, is truncating the eastern end of the B82 Local to Ralph Av. If you rode that route (the local), you'd see how horrible an idea that is. Rockaway Parkway, sure, but shortening it to Ralph cuts away people's direct connection to the many amenities on Flatlands Av in that area. Not down with that. 
 
The B82 Limited should be eliminated. It ain't working as is during the hours it's used the most. And because of this, travelers do need a transfer to the Brighton Line. You can't just shaft that connection. However you can improve that connection. I have an idea for that. More info below.
 
The current routing of the B82 around Flatbush Avenue needs to go, the SBS change to Avenue K is a must.
 
Shore Road/Owls Head Park - from experience, that terminal doesn't best serves the customers that would use the route, and that also somewhat duplicates the B9 in that area. A better, more connective terminal would be 4th and 86th.
 
The B5 and B50 shouldn't have been combined, but instead reorganized, and based on my experiences riding the route (B82) these past few years, I'll detail my suggestions based on what they planned, what I see, and your ideas.
 
The B5 should be restored and operate from Coney Island-Stillwell Av to Kings Highway  (B)  (Q) station, via current B82 routing.
 
The B50 should be restored and operate from Coney Island Avenue/Kings Highway (The B7 terminal) to Rockaway Parkway (L) station via Kings Highway, Avenue K, Flatlands Av, Rockaway Parkway Station area2, Glenwood Rd, East 103 Street, back to Flatlands Av, and current routing to Spring Creek.
 
The B82 Limited should be eliminated as a part of this idea.
 
The B82 SBS should operate from Spring Creek Towers to 86 Street  (R) station via 4th Avenue, 60th Street, 8th Avenue, 65th Street, Avenue P, Coney Island Avenue, Kings Highway1, Avenue K, Flatlands Av, Rockaway Parkway Station area2, Glenwood Rd, East 103 Street, back to Flatlands Av, and current routing to Spring Creek.
 
If they were getting rid of all cars on Kings Highway between Coney Island Av and Ocean Av from 6am-7pm at least, then I'm down for the straight route through Kings Highway. Otherwise, that's no good. Use a combination of Avenue P, East 16th St, and Avenue R westbound, and Kings Highway eastbound only.
 
2 So far, I like the DOT/MTA's idea of turning Glenwood into a two-way, but I need more information to really be all for it.

West of the Brighton, I'd extend the 100 to Caesars Bay shopping ctr.

Hmm, I could go with this instead of that B5 idea. Would help free up a slot for the B82 SBS (in my plan) to stop westbound.

 

 

And back to the last piece of your post BrooklynBus - The B41 SBS idea is a joke. As a matter of fact, I wouldn't be surprised if they cut the limited.

Edited by Rick44

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What is the B81?

A fictional route number for a B82 SBS....

 

 

West of the Brighton, I'd extend the 100 to Caesars Bay shopping ctr....

Hmm, I could go with this instead of that B5 idea. Would help free up a slot for the B82 SBS (in my plan) to stop westbound.

Yeah, I wouldn't revert the B5 - even if it meant an extension to CI on the southern end & a truncation on the eastern end from Kings Hwy/Flatbush av to Kings Hwy (B)(Q).... Never saw much promise with the old B5, and even with more usage on the current B82 west of the Brighton line (compared to the usage of the old B5 period), the MTA would shortchange a route like that (in terms of service levels).... At least w/ the B100, it's an "established" route that does quite well for itself....

 

It would be nothing like what the MTA did with the old B5 & B50 to form today's B82.... Combined a struggling route with a route that had a potent riderbase to create one long-winded ass route.... That happened in '95 & the B5 only went as far south as Canal av/Pathmark.... 7 or 8 years later (sometime in the early 2000's) is how long it took for the MTA to extend that route to CI....  It took them another 7 or 8 years to throw LTD service onto it (happened after the "doomsday" cuts IINM)....

 

.....and now here we are in 2017 -  another 7 years later, and here we are talking about a B82 SBS....

 

You don't have to bother admitting wrongdoing if you keep shifting the goalpost.... This is what this agency does with these route alterations... Screw a B82 and an SBS on it.

Edited by B35 via Church
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

B82 to Bay Ridge ??  I'm confused (pls elaborate).. The current B82 starts in Coney Island & Ulmer Park.

Why in hell the (MTA) even thought about starting a route in Bay Ridge 4th Avenue..

 

I'm in full agreement with you with the B5 and B50 should of never had to split.

When the southern Brooklyn SBS was originally announced as it was called before they decided it would just be the B82, it was supposed to start at 86 St Fourth Avenue and then go along 86 Street and turn up Bay Parkway and then follow the B82 either along no Kings Highway or Avenue P. SBS under the 86 Street el would have been insane but the MTA insisted they could make it work. I think they planned to ban all parking under the el but the community would have none of that. Bath Avenue could have been considered as an alternative because it would have been better than 86 St but it was never considered.

 

Then magically without explanation it just became either a B6 or B82 SBS or both. Now it looks like it is just a B82 SBS. They talk about community input but just ignore all the input unless there is a mass protest. The use selective community quotes to support what they already decided and call that "participation."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe I saw a fare machine installed on the M79 (E 79th Street and Second Av)

They should be all installed by now or at least the work underground anyway.  They were installing them during the wintertime.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

B82 or B86

Neither. They didn't give it a number. I should not have called it B82. Sorry for the confusion.

 

What is the B81? Unless that's a typo, I need some clarity on that and the B82 SBS to Bay Ridge. I've never heard of that. Ever.

 

As I said, Southern Brooklyn SBS, not B82. It's in the SBS Future Corridors Phase 2 report I believe on the DOT website.

 

If that is a typo and you meant B82 SBS - then absolutely not. As I already said earlier, the Belt Parkway would screw that up real quickly. Unless you go the "back way" using local streets, which I mentioned somewhere else in the forums, and got met with the "it's a roundabout routing" - to which I said "it's still faster than the Belt". Now that they've added the speedbumps on Van Siclen Av between Seaview Av and Vandalia Av - it would be slower.

 

On the wide portions of Flatlands Avenue (Ralph to Pennsylvania) there is congestion and disorganization during the rush hours. People double park, lots of traffic because people wanna avoid the Belt Parkway, etc. The lanes will help the buses there during those peak hours (only). And maybe during the rush hours they should ban parking on that wide section of Flatlands Av.

 

Your SBS idea isn't bad. I like some of it.

 

What I like about your idea is the better connections it'd make for people on the western side of the route. I'm down for Bay Ridge for the most part - just some slight changes I would make on that end. More info below.

 

What I don't like about your idea, is truncating the eastern end of the B82 Local to Ralph Av. If you rode that route (the local), you'd see how horrible an idea that is. Rockaway Parkway, sure, but shortening it to Ralph cuts away people's direct connection to the many amenities on Flatlands Av in that area. Not down with that.

 

Rockaway Pkway instead of Ralph certainly is a possibility. I chose Ralph because that is where the B6 joins Flatlands Ave.

 

The B82 Limited should be eliminated. It ain't working as is during the hours it's used the most. And because of this, travelers do need a transfer to the Brighton Line. You can't just shaft that connection. However you can improve that connection. I have an idea for that. More info below.

 

The current routing of the B82 around Flatbush Avenue needs to go, the SBS change to Avenue K is a must.

 

Avenue K was the original B50 route but it was changed due to community opposition. I doubt it if the current planners even know that.

 

Shore Road/Owls Head Park - from experience, that terminal doesn't best serves the customers that would use the route, and that also somewhat duplicates the B9 in that area. A better, more connective terminal would be 4th and 86th.

 

I didn't propose Shore Road Owls Head Park. I proposed 101 Street and 4th Ave/ Shore Road.

 

The B5 and B50 shouldn't have been combined, but instead reorganized, and based on my experiences riding the route (B82) these past few years, I'll detail my suggestions based on what they planned, what I see, and your ideas.

 

The B5 should be restored and operate from Coney Island-Stillwell Av to Kings Highway (B)(Q) station, via current B82 routing.

 

No turn around at E 16. Guess you mean Ocean Avenue.

 

The B50 should be restored and operate from Coney Island Avenue/Kings Highway (The B7 terminal) to Rockaway Parkway (L) station via Kings Highway, Avenue K, Flatlands Av, Rockaway Parkway Station area2, Glenwood Rd, East 103 Street, back to Flatlands Av, and current routing to Spring Creek.

 

The B82 Limited should be eliminated as a part of this idea.

 

The B82 SBS should operate from Spring Creek Towers to 86 Street (R) station via 4th Avenue, 60th Street, 8th Avenue, 65th Street, Avenue P, Coney Island Avenue, Kings Highway1, Avenue K, Flatlands Av, Rockaway Parkway Station area2, Glenwood Rd, East 103 Street, back to Flatlands Av, and current routing to Spring Creek.

 

Don't see the purpose of duplicating the R service between 86 Street and 60 Street on Fourth Avenue. Shore Rd is a much bettter idea. Express bus riders would switch to the SBS and the subway with a direct connection to express service at 59 Street.

 

1 If they were getting rid of all cars on Kings Highway between Coney Island Av and Ocean Av from 6am-7pm at least, then I'm down for the straight route through Kings Highway. Otherwise, that's no good. Use a combination of Avenue P, East 16th St, and Avenue R westbound, and Kings Highway eastbound only.

 

2 So far, I like the DOT/MTA's idea of turning Glenwood into a two-way, but I need more information to really be all for it.

 

Hmm, I could go with this instead of that B5 idea. Would help free up a slot for the B82 SBS (in my plan) to stop westbound.

 

 

And back to the last piece of your post BrooklynBus - The B41 SBS idea is a joke. As a matter of fact, I wouldn't be surprised if they cut the limited.

 

I haven't studied what is going on with Glenwood Road so I won't comment. As far as the B41 SBS, of course it would replace the limited. The part about routing the B9 to E 71 Street, I proposed back in 1972, but I would have retained the B41 Bergen Beach branch in rush hours instead of operating it only to the Junction.

Edited by BrooklynBus

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Bx6 SBS is unusual. First, the route doesn't have an existing limited route to convert to SBS, unlike the Bx12, M15, B44, or B46. Second, the local route will stay, unlike the M86 or M23.

 

IMO the B82 SBS should continue on Kings Highway past Flatbush unlike the current B82, which turns right. Then the B82 SBS should turn right on Glenwood and continue the whole way until Pennsylvania Av. This should be done for both directions of B82 SBS, and anyway, even if the B82 retained the same route, would be much faster for SBS riders since Glenwood has fewer routes and bus frequency than Flatlands.

If a LIC route is being converted to SBS, how about the Q69? The only thing is that in the north, it parallels the M60. Looks like the most logical choice though; the Q102 is right under the Astoria line, and the Q103 and Q104 basically hug the shore, serving a smaller area.

 

The S79 went straight from pure local to pure limited +SBS+ limited. The M60 went from pure local to SBS-only. I don't see how it's anything unusual to add an +SBS+ layer directly to a route.

 

And Glenwood is right by the B6/103, both of which have limited-stop service (the B103 is obviously a limited-only route). Flatlands Avenue is already screwed by the fact that they don't have access to the IRT. No point in adding insult to injury by taking away quicker access to the Brighton Line (even if you don't agree that the B82 limited or +SBS+ would be much quicker than the local, you have to admit it's less service along Flatlands, which knowing how the MTA tends to favor the +SBS+ over the local, is a problem).

 

 

My thought is that it would be westbound Glenwood Rd would be bus-only westbound between 103rd and 96th.

 

I assume so, but then I'm unsure whom this SBS benefits.

 

Agree with all these sentiments.

 

Nah the road changes on the B82 route are more important than most would believe, gotta take the route in the area in different times of day to notice.

 

I think you're right. On page 16, they say they're putting in a one-way bus lane in that section, and it shows it on the westbound side of the street. (I think I saw one-way bus lanes in another presentation, probably the Bx6 one by the Grand Concourse).

 

I guess those people that ride for most of the route.  The problem is you have people that ride it for short distances such as from say 163rd and 3rd to River Avenue. The real issue is the slow boarding and dwell times, which is another reason that it makes no sense to keep local service.  You could still eliminate a few stops along the way and make the line efficient.  

 

163rd & 3rd to River Avenue is a mile. I wouldn't consider that short (unless you want to consider people taking the B46 from the IRT to Church Avenue as a short trip, or the entire B42 & B74 routes as people taking short trips).

 

I would say the local stops are still reasonably spaced. They eliminated the double stop at 161st & Jerome (but kept one stop so people in High Bridge still have direct access to/from the EB Bx6). The +SBS+ doesn't stop at Gerard (for those needing the west side of the GC who don't want to or can't walk uphill from River), Morris, Melrose MNRR station, Westchester Avenue, or the Forest Houses (I'd also say you need a stop between Southern & Intervale). I'd say there's enough moderate ridership stops that don't warrant the +SBS+ stopping there, but still warrant some coverage.

 

I'm still going to jump on the bandwagon and say the Bx46 should be included in the +SBS+ plan in some capacity.

 

Don't know what you're trying to say with this....

 

I think he's saying that the only real advantage to +SBS+ is that the +SBS+ will run 7 days a week, as opposed to the current limited which only runs rush hours. (In other words, you could achieve the same result by expanding the span of limited-stop service)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This was the main problem I knew would happen with the B82 SBS. As far as Glenwood being turned back into a two way street yeah right, Eastbound service can use Glenwood it's faster then flatlands and it won't affect the B6 or B60. Westbound not to sure what they can do the L cut off all streets until Rockaway Parkway. Skiping Rocakway is not a option I'm take a wild shot here. Turn Conklin street into Bus only between E 96 to E 98 Street.

 

Wesrbound Service pattern: B6, B6LTD, B82

 

R - E 96 Street

R - R Conklin

L - E 98 Street

 

Regular route

 

The SBS & B17 would use Glenwood Road still.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

163rd & 3rd to River Avenue is a mile. I wouldn't consider that short (unless you want to consider people taking the B46 from the IRT to Church Avenue as a short trip, or the entire B42 & B74 routes as people taking short trips).

It's short in comparison to the entire route, and I have walked from the Grand Concourse to the Boricua College area regularly.  It is a doable walk... Do it consistently in 10 - 15 minutes, and have out walked plenty of Bx6 buses too in that stretch.  Now walking from the Metro-North (East 153rd Street-Yankee Stadium) station to say the Boricua College area is a bit longer, but also doable, and I have done that as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As someone who frequents the B82 as an alternative to the B103 or B6 for commuting, how will the westbound Glenwood Rd reroute work given that its one-way until East 103rd St?

 

It looks like they want to put in a single westbound lane for buses only.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let me clear my throat...

 

- I feel the Bx6 is being set up the way it is solely because of the antiquity of the payment system. This a route that has seen little to no push for LTD service to be implemented but now that we're adding bus lanes and payment machines into the equation we need a LTD variant Bx6? The MTA looked at the Bx6 and saw that the ridership numbers could call for off-board payment and knew that putting machines at every stop would be unfeasible. So they went and picked the busiest stops to give machines to and now that you have that it only makes sense to have a variant of the route only make those stops. In a world with a 21st century payment method the Bx6 would not be running Limited stop service.

 

- The B82 Coney Island situation was taken straight out of the B46 'let the local cover the full route' playbook.  That playbook is not working out well on the B46 so either there's gross incompetence at play or likely subterfuge. The elephant in the room here that I'm concerned with the B82 deals with frequencies and service span. The service span for the current B82 Limited ends early in the PM Rush for Westbound trips along most of the route with local service running every 8-10 minutes following the last LTD trip. Running both a LTD and a local variant without drastically increasing the number of buses dedicated to the route would be a huge loss vs existing service. The B82 is one of those routes where it's a low headway route for only the daytime hours on weekdays and the SBS/Local setup should be reserved for routes that are low headway routes pretty much all day every day. How do you provide service an appropriate level to both an SBS and local variant of the B82 without overserving the route?

 

- As far as LIC is concerned the problem with bus travel there is that most of the commercial demand to LIC is satisfied by the subway. Something that I think could work would be a route that combines the Q101 and Q103. The northern terminal would be shared with the Q101 (or could be LGA or Rikers) and the southern terminal would be shared with the Q103. My thought process is that linking the condos along the waterfront and the industrial area surrounding 21st to the vibrancy of Steinway Street could be a winner in terms of getting spurring transit usage beyond the subway in LIC. The route would take (from south to north) Vernon - 44 Rd - 21st - 36 Av - Steinway - Ditmars - 49 St (Northbound), Hazen (Southbound)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I dou

 

My guess for LIC SBS would maybe be the Q32.

Doubt the Q32 would get SBS before a route like the Q66 or the Q69/100 the Q32 is mirrored by the 7 for most of the route, so passanger wanting a faster rider can and already do take the 7. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As a daily rider of the Bx6, I look forward to the SBS conversion. The section between Morris Avenue and River Avenue is choked with traffic during large parts of the day and the buses crawl. At least I can expect the bus lanes to be respected with all the courthouses right in the area.

 

Aside from the fact I'll need to backtrack 3 blocks to Prospect Avenue, that still leaves me 4 stops from the (D) which is better than now. The Bx6 is also quite frequent most of the day so even with the split frequencies, I'm not too worried.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let me clear my throat...

 

- I feel the Bx6 is being set up the way it is solely because of the antiquity of the payment system. This a route that has seen little to no push for LTD service to be implemented but now that we're adding bus lanes and payment machines into the equation we need a LTD variant Bx6? The MTA looked at the Bx6 and saw that the ridership numbers could call for off-board payment and knew that putting machines at every stop would be unfeasible. So they went and picked the busiest stops to give machines to and now that you have that it only makes sense to have a variant of the route only make those stops. In a world with a 21st century payment method the Bx6 would not be running Limited stop service.

 

 

 I do agree that the logical progression should be local -> local/LTD -> local/SBS. It's why I'm kind of surprised they pushed for this before making the Bx15 SBS but they haven't even contemplated new LTD Service in the Bronx since 09. I can think of at least 4 routes that need LTD service, even if its only on a segment of the route/rush hours only (including the Bx6).

 

I'm not convinced they did this on the Hunts Point side.... from my experience Lafayette/Coster has high ridership than Seneca (the post office is near the former for one thing) and Seneca is literally the stop after the (6). I'm not too familiar with the ridership south of Spofford/HP but if the point is to speed up rides, wouldn't it have made more sense to have it stop at Southern, Lafayette, Spofford, then use HP Av straight to Food Center Dr? Viele also seems unnecessary.

 

I would say the local stops are still reasonably spaced. They eliminated the double stop at 161st & Jerome (but kept one stop so people in High Bridge still have direct access to/from the EB Bx6). The +SBS+ doesn't stop at Gerard (for those needing the west side of the GC who don't want to or can't walk uphill from River), Morris, Melrose MNRR station, Westchester Avenue, or the Forest Houses (I'd also say you need a stop between Southern & Intervale). I'd say there's enough moderate ridership stops that don't warrant the +SBS+ stopping there, but still warrant some coverage.

 

I'm still going to jump on the bandwagon and say the Bx46 should be included in the +SBS+ plan in some capacity.

 

Not sure if you're familiar with the area but River and Gerard are adjacent to each other. The presentation leaves me with the impression the SBS will keep the current Bx6 stop W/B, E/B SBS gets a new stop before the light at River, and the local keeps the E/B stop at Gerard which is fine. The problem is actually the fact that they plan on putting the new W/B local stop at the Bridge Overpass (I'm assuming they expect anyone going west to use the SBS) but its way too far from River to expect passengers coming from the east to walk .The W/B Bx6 local either needs to use the service road from Sherman-River and stop with the Bx13 (not happening) or they remove the parking on the NW side of 161/River and add the stop there.

 

The way I see it, the Bx46's chances of garnering anymore usage than it currently has just went out the window. The only thing I can think of is making it a branch of the Bx6 local.

Edited by Q43 Floral Park

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 I do agree that the logical progression should be local -> local/LTD -> local/SBS. It's why I'm kind of surprised they pushed for this before making the Bx15 SBS but they haven't even contemplated new LTD Service in the Bronx since 09. I can think of at least 4 routes that need LTD service, even if its only on a segment of the route/rush hours only (including the Bx6)....

Maybe I'm stuck on the mindset that SBS isn't that much different than LTD service, but the way I see it, LTD service should have never been a thing.... It's NYC being late as usual when it comes to public transportation..... The enhancement/complement to trips making all stops on some route should have been off board payment that makes the "traditional" LTD stops (xfers to other bus routes).... Instead, we have buses running local service, buses running LTD service (for now anyway), and buses making even less stops than LTD service..... On top of it, we have this failed attempt at a BRT that's essentially phasing out LTD service - that comes fully equipped with the prerequisite of worsened local service (for the routes that still have a local counterpart, that is)....

 

There hasn't been a single route with SBS on it that has a local counterpart where service on said counterpart's gotten better.... And we aint gonna see it happen either; it would completely go against the MTA's narrative....

 

What was the last route that actually got LTD service anyway? The Q21 (which is today's Q52)?

 

I'm not too familiar with the ridership south of Spofford/HP but if the point is to speed up rides, wouldn't it have made more sense to have it stop at Southern, Lafayette, Spofford, then use HP Av straight to Food Center Dr? Viele also seems unnecessary.

FWIW, South of Spofford (towards the Food Center), ridership is rather sparse... Heading towards Manhattan, everybody piles on at the 1st stop... Anyway, you probably won't lose anything by having SBS' stop at Viele (or gain anything by not having Viele as an SBS stop).... If I were to guess, I'd say they made that as an SBS stop for anyone xferring to the Bx46 back north....

 

The way I see it, the Bx46's chances of garnering anymore usage than it currently has just went out the window. The only thing I can think of is making it a branch of the Bx6 local.

This has more or less been the consensus on this forum before day 1 :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.